Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site umich.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!mb2c!umich!torek
From: torek@umich.UUCP (Paul V. Torek )
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: philosophy of science & creationism
Message-ID: <297@umich.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 16-Oct-85 14:07:11 EDT
Article-I.D.: umich.297
Posted: Wed Oct 16 14:07:11 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 18-Oct-85 00:37:25 EDT
References: <11384@rochester.UUCP> <615@hou2g.UUCP> <143@ucdavis.UUCP> <12288@rochester.UUCP> <46@utastro.UUCP>
Reply-To: torek@umich.UUCP (Paul V. Torek )
Organization: University of Michigan, EECS Dept., Ann Arbor, MI
Lines: 30
Summary: 

In article <46@utastro.UUCP> bill@utastro.UUCP (William H. Jefferys) writes:
>NOTHING in science can ever be definitely proven.  If you don't understand
>this, you don't understand science.
>
>On the other hand, if an idea can't be shot down in principle, it's not
>science.  The existence of black holes, just as evolution, the ancient
>age of the earth, and all the other assertions of science that Creationists
>object to, could in principle be shot down scientifically, given the
>appropriate evidence. [...]

So far, so good.

>NOTHING could in principle ever disprove your assertion that "what we observe
>in nature is...the effect God has had on nature, namely, creationism".  

I'm an agnostic, but in fairness to atheists, I wouldn't rule out the possi-
bility of disproving that assertion -- it might be done by proving that God
does not exist.  But more to the point, you have understated creationism.
It doesn't just say that "whatever is in nature, God created it".  It says
"certain things (e.g. evolution, a multibillion-year-old earth, etc.) ARE
NOT in nature".  That statement is falsifiable -- and falsified!

>I object to teaching of Creationism in the public schools because it is
>not science, but pretends to be science.  It's pseudoscience.  
>	Bill Jefferys  8-%

I object to it because though it is the kind of theory that can be tested
by science, it is false; i.e. there is plenty of evidence against it.

--Paul V Torek, upping the ante				torek@umich